My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04SA44 Amici Curiae Brief
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
7001-8000
>
04SA44 Amici Curiae Brief
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/10/2015 10:33:01 AM
Creation date
4/10/2014 12:02:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Amici Curaie brief from the Rio Grande Water Conservation District in support of CWCB in the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District's RICD Case No. 02CW038.
State
CO
Basin
Gunnison
Water Division
4
Date
7/26/2004
Author
Rio Grande Water Conservancy District
Title
04SA44 Amici Curiae Brief
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
adding RICD to the definition of "beneficial use," Senate Bill 216 does not change these <br />fundamental elements. <br />The General Assembly was keenly aware that limits on water rights for RICD purposes <br />are necessary because, unlike appropriations for traditional consumptive uses, there is no <br />consumptive use to measure and limit the right. See App., 4/12/01 Senate Committee Hearing at <br />23 (Rep. Paulson); id. at 38 (M. Pifher); 4/18/01 Senate Committee Hearing at 22 (M. Shimmin); <br />id. at 33 (R. Trout); id. at 36 (P. Wells). Unregulated, water rights for RICDs have the potential <br />to allow water users to obtain rights to the entire flow of a stream because there are virtually no <br />limits on the ability to control water within a stream channel for recreational uses, particularly <br />for the more extreme forms of white water kayaking and rafting. From the Golden case, in <br />particular, the General Assembly was well aware that extremely large flows could be claimed for <br />in- channel "expert" kayak courses. <br />Thus, the General Assembly recognized that reasonable limits on water rights for RICD <br />purposes were critical to balance the use of water for in- channel recreational use with the ability <br />to divert and store water under our compact entitlements for more traditional consumptive use <br />purposes, and the water court's obligation to determine the minimum stream flow required for a <br />reasonable recreation experience is therefore a critical component of the General Assembly's <br />policy to maximize the beneficial use of water in this state. If water courts are not required to <br />determine the minimum stream flow for a reasonable recreational experience, cities and other <br />governmental entities could lay claim to water rights for RICD purposes for large stream flows <br />for "expert " kayaking courses or other extreme forms of white water recreation, thereby <br />preventing the diversion and storage of water for traditional consumptive uses, as well as <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.